Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Newsbot!
    Banned
    • Feb 2008
    • 1331

    PubMed: RNA-seq : technical variability and sampling.

    Syndicated from PubMed RSS Feeds

    RNA-seq : technical variability and sampling.

    BMC Genomics. 2011 Jun 6;12(1):293

    Authors: McIntyre LM, Lopiano KK, Morse AM, Amin V, Oberg AL, Young LJ, Nuzhdin SV

    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: RNA-seq is revolutionizing the way we study transcriptomes. mRNA can be surveyed without prior knowledge of gene transcripts. Alternative splicing of transcript isoforms and the identification of previously unknown exons are being reported. Initial reports of differences in exon usage, and splicing between samples as well as quantitative differences among samples are beginning to surface. Biological variation has been reported to be larger than technical variation. In addition, technical variation has been reported to be in line with expectations due to random sampling. However, strategies for dealing with technical variation will differ depending on the magnitude. The size of technical variance, and the role of sampling are examined in this manuscript. RESULTS: In this study three independent Solexa/Illumina experiments containing technical replicates are analyzed. When coverage is low, large disagreements between technical replicates are apparent. Exon detection between technical replicates is highly variable when the coverage is less than 5 reads per nucleotide and estimates of gene expression are more likely to disagree when coverage is low. Although large disagreements in the estimates of expression are observed at all levels of coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Technical variability is too high to ignore. Technical variability results in inconsistent detection of exons at low levels of coverage. Further, the estimate of the relative abundance of a transcript can substantially disagree, even when coverage levels are high. This may be due to the low sampling fraction and if so, it will persist as an issue needing to be addressed in experimental design even as the next wave of technology produces larger numbers of reads. We provide practical recommendations for dealing with the technical variability, without dramatic cost increases.

    PMID: 21645359 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]



    More...

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • GATTACAT
    Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
    by GATTACAT
    Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
    Yesterday, 11:43 AM
  • SEQadmin2
    Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
    by SEQadmin2


    I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

    Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
    06-18-2026, 07:11 AM

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by SEQadmin2, Today, 11:08 AM
0 responses
6 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
0 responses
11 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
0 responses
19 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
0 responses
53 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Working...